I know. I would rather they dump their kids off somewhere, drive two-seaters, and whoop it up at all the latest hot spots. Thing is, when their kids are growning up (teen age...college) they will have a much richer life than you will without those people (kids and all their friends and family) in your life. Being a parent is rather inglorious at first, in fact it is downright humiliating, but coming out of it with your kids in tow is a great life. Careful what you wish for.
Thanks for letting me know how my poor decisions will lead to a meager life later on, stranger on the Internet!
Presumptuous much? Child rearing is not the end-all of human existence. One can live a happy and fulfilling life without children. I frankly do not want the responsibility, and have made a conscious choice. It seems you have made a different choice, and if you're happy with it I applaud you. But don't assume yours is the only way. I enjoy my single life and have no regrets about it.
Government made them difficult and expensive to buy compared to SUV's, which were classified as trucks (hence a lower gas mileage standard).
"Stigma" had nothing to do with it.
Maybe so, but there is still a stigma attached to minivans. They say, "I now live a boring suburban lifestyle". A friend of mine said as much when he bought his Honda Odyssey. He loves the Odyssey, but he knew he was no longer cool. And, to be fair, once he and his wife had kids they became just as staid and boring as their minivan suggested.
It's cool; they're happy with their lives and love their kids and home life. But it reminded me of why I'm still single and childless. That life is unattractive to me.
The other thing is from an individual point of view you can live off the grid in a tent but it won't make any difference. Even if your whole country starts living in a tent off the grid it won't make a big change. So why live in extreme discomfort when it won't make any difference, anyway? Instead we need to accept that people will not modify their habits and do something like perhaps cut military spending a smidgeon and direct it into a Manhattan-project style push for better technology for generating power and for using it more efficiently.
This is my view. I believe that AGW is real, but I am not taking any extra measure to save energy in light of that understanding. It won't make a difference if I change my lifestyle. Society has to change its lifestyle. I support green energy initiatives and try to vote for people who seem to get it. I'm willing to pay more for energy if need be. But I'm driving my car just as much as I would otherwise. I'd love to drive an electric car, but mostly for the torque not the efficiency. My electric bill is already about $35 a month, so there is probably little to reduce there.
What we really need is for the powers that be to give up their dreams of petroleum riches and start society on the path to clean, sustainable energy. But a new energy economy is uncertain, while the oil, gas and coal in the ground are known quantities. Those reserves represent potential profit to the energy industry, and they want that money. So they baffle people with bullshit to keep the money train running, putting us all at risk. AGW is an issue that can't wait for oil to get expensive enough, or solar to get cheap enough. Therefore it is not a problem capitalism can solve. But capitalism is what runs the world; maybe over a cliff.
Cash needs to be done with because its primary uses these days include buying illegal drugs, pay for illicit services, dodge taxes, and conduct money laundering. No normal human being in America really needs to keep using cash for legitimate purposes these days. I can't wait till cash is just abolished, anonymous money transactions are really evil and hurt America.
Hmm, what to make of this one? Trolling? Naive? Paid shill? Pure sarcasm? It can be hard to tell these days!
Are we assuming all transactions humans do are with merchants? Naive as hell ! Crappy list of examples, I'm sure there are hundreds of examples: 1) What about if I want to buy your [insert bike or computer or whatever]? 2) Baby sitter? 3) Kid's allowance? 4) Pay some kid kid to mow yard. 5) Underground transactions (illegal stuff) The importance of cash will continue to decline with transactions with merchants, but it will never remotely approach "cashless".
And, as implied here, once we go cashless they've got us by the balls. People might not appreciate the value of easy, anonymous transactions until they're gone. Who are "they" you ask? Insert your favorite power structure. There is utility in being able to conduct private business without the need for any middle-man or money transfer service.
Remember what happened with Wikileaks donations and the credit card companies, when the latter started denying payment services for the former? Cash enables the average person to pay for or support things without permission. That's important if you want an empowered citizenry. I'll keep using cash, thanks.
Or you could realize that we should live up to the title of 'land of the free' and make decisions based on that. There really doesn't need to be a 100% literal and explicit definition of those things for you to see that things like the TSA and NSA spying are unconstitutional.
We can certainly agree on that.
So the TSA is accomplishing what exactly?
Getting people used to invasive authority?
Changing times and ambiguities in the original text say otherwise.
Then consult historical documents. It's a living document only in the sense that it can be amended.
Even in the case where we're explicitly saying "this is a dead document, follow it literally", the meanings of words change over time and the original meaning imparted by the text is lost.
Only true if the government intentionally ignores history.
What is the literal, non-interpreted meaning of "unusual punishment" or "unreasonable search"?
This was specifically for international flights into the US originating from certain countries, not a TSA-wide procedure.
Good point! However, it is not being reported that way. It's being reported like Syrian and Yemeni terrorists (it's spreading!) have found a new way to be diabolical, so the TSA has stepped up security, so you'd better be careful and not run afoul of the TSA. That detail about it only being from certain countries is not being conveyed in the reporting I've seen.
Testify! As was said before on
Facebook's ability to do that is right there in the EULA. Yes, I actually read Facebook's EULA. Anything you post on the site is yours, but they enjoy the right to use it in any way they like while it's there. So this journalist agreed to let them do that when she signed up. She likely didn't know that, because who actually reads EULA's, right? It's one more reason I'm not on Facebook.